ArticleScientific reports2023
Exploring the microbiome of two uterine sites in cows.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microbiome Engineering in Dairy Cattle: A Critical Review of Strategies for Disease Resistance, Productivity, and Sustainable Farming.Veterinary sciences · 2026Review
- Bacterial and Fungal Dynamics of the Uterine Microbiota in Postpartum Beef Cows Supplemented with Grape Pomace.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Characterization of bacterial communities of ewe's vaginal tract and its potential impact on reproductive efficiency.Animal microbiome · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bacterial communities in the mammalian reproductive system can be rich and diverse, differing in structure and quantity depending on location. In addition, its microbiome is associated with the state of health of this tract and reproductive success. This study evaluated the microbiome composition of the uterine body (UB) and uterine horn mucosa (UH) samples using 16S rRNA sequencing of samples extracted from cows in the Amazon region. It was observed that four main phyla were shared between the uterine sites: Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes, and Proteobacteria. Linear discriminant analysis effect size and heat tree analysis showed that members of Lachnospiraceae (NK3A20 group) and Oscillospiraceae were significantly more abundant in the UB than in UH. In addition, there are more unique genera in the UB than in the UH. A higher bacterial load in UB than in UH is expected because of the exposure to external factors of UB. However, comparing the site's communities through beta diversity did not generate well-defined clustering. Thus, it can be attributed to the closeness of the sites, which would make the niches similar ecologically and microbiologically. Therefore, this research provides knowledge to understand biomarkers in the prior reproduction period.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.